Legislature(2017 - 2018)BARNES 124
02/08/2018 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB298 | |
| HB269 | |
| HB267 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 267 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 269 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 298 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 298-NUMBER OF SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES
8:02:31
8:02:10 AM
CO-CHAIR PARISH announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 298, "An Act relating to the number of
superior court judges in the first judicial district; and
providing for an effective date."
8:02:49 AM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Administrative Offices, Alaska
Court System, testified during the hearing on HB 298, on behalf
of the House Rules Committee, sponsor by request of the Alaska
Court System. She stated that HB 298 would increase the number
of Alaska Superior Court judges by one, and that increase would
be in the First Judicial Court District, in Southeast Alaska.
The bill carries a zero fiscal note. This statutory change is
being proposed by the court system and is an administrative
matter. She noted that the last time the court brought forth a
request to the legislature was in 2011, when two seats were
added to the Anchorage Judicial Court District, bringing the
total number at that time from 40 to 42. She explained that AS
22.10.120 sets the number of Alaska Superior Court judges and
requires the Alaska Court System to get legislative
authorization to increase the number; this is mandated under
Article IV of the Constitution of the State of Alaska. She said
the same is not true for district court judges, a fact she said
would become relevant as she explains the court's desired
outcome under HB 298.
8:05:05 AM
MS. MEADE said the chief justice, in his state of the judiciary
speech, had expressed that the Juneau Superior Court is
overburdened with casework relative to the number of superior
court judges, and it has been this way for many years. It has
the second-highest number of superior court case filings per
superior court judge in the state; the highest is Anchorage.
She said in some ways it is not a fair comparison because
Anchorage has many other resources and is set up differently,
such that Anchorage does not need another superior court judge.
Because of Juneau's paucity of judges, she explained, the Juneau
Superior Court may not be able to schedule hearings as quickly
and written work does not get done in a timely manner. She said
the court has recognized this for some time: in 2014 and again
in 2015, the court had a capital budget request for an extra
courtroom in the Dimond Court House in Juneau, but that was not
funded. A request was made in 2016 for additional rooms but was
not funded. Having the extra rooms would have at least allowed
a visiting judge to hold hearings at the same time as the
sitting judges were holding hearings. As a result, the Juneau
caseload has been redistributed. Specifically, the presiding
judge of the First Judicial Court District, who lives and works
in Ketchikan, has been traveling to Juneau to help alleviate the
case backlog. To lighten the load on his Juneau colleagues,
this judge has been taking on approximately one-third of the
Juneau civil cases, all the administrative agency appeals
brought to the Juneau Superior Court, and periodic big criminal
trials. She said he has been doing this for several years,
which means he has been working unsustainable hours for that
time. She said it is not a model that the court wants to
continue; therefore, it has been looking for a better solution.
8:08:00 AM
MS. MEADE noted a solution may have presented itself because of
lucky timing. She explained that a district court judge in
Juneau has announced retirement this summer, so the Juneau
Supreme Court wants to convert that seat into a Juneau Superior
Court seat. She reviewed that superior court judges are judges
of general jurisdiction while district court judges have limited
jurisdiction. She noted that typically, superior court judges
handle felonies, domestic relations, probate matters, and civil
cases in which the amount of controversy is over $100,000. She
then listed that which district court judges handle. Currently,
Juneau has two superior and two district court judges.
Converting the one district court seat to a superior court seat
can be done with nearly no fiscal impact, because the same
office, computer, and supplies can be used, as well as existing
judicial assistance and resources. She said the only difference
in cost is the difference in salary, which would be
approximately $35,500, which would be absorbed by the court
system via attrition and savings the court has achieved in other
areas. For example, there are unfilled positions in a long-term
vacancy pool, the savings from which can be used to address the
wage difference.
8:11:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS indicated that he learned from the
judicial address given the day before and is impressed with the
court system's focus on frugality and efficiency. He expressed
support for HB 298. He asked if it would make sense in the
future to request the clerks for this proposed new superior
court judge.
MS. MEADE said she has heard this concern before. She explained
that the new judge would share the judicial assistants and two
law clerks presently in the Juneau Superior Court, and "everyone
thinks that that will be a fine solution and will work out
well," because the addition of a judge will bring down the
filings significantly, and two law clerks are considered
sufficient to handle that caseload. She said the court's plan
is not to come back to make the request outlined by
Representative Kreiss-Tomkins. If the court does need an
additional law clerk, it would seek to address that need by
moving positions around within the court system. She said she
cannot promise the request would never be made of the
legislature, but at this point there is no plan to ask in the
future. She offered other examples to show that sharing law
clerks is not uncommon.
8:13:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked how much savings has been seen from
"that 5 percent reduction in employees" and how much of that
savings would be taken up by the swapping out of one district
court judge to gain one superior court judge.
MS. MEADE answered that the court system has lost 11 percent of
its work force, several of which have been from the First
Judicial Court District. She said 45 positions have been
eliminated and there are about 32 positions in the long-term
vacancy pool. She said she does not know what the actual cost
savings is, but she said she knows one unfilled assistant to an
administrator position brought a savings to the court of
approximately $70,000, including benefits. The proposed
reclassification of the judge is only half that amount. In
response to Representative Saddler, she said she would provide
the requested total to the committee.
8:15:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND asked if the caseload has diminished,
increased, or stayed about the same.
MS. MEADE answered that the caseloads fluctuate but have not
changed significantly. She offered examples. In response to a
follow-up question, she related that in some instances, but not
others, cases are taking longer to process. She added, "Yes, it
can be a little bit slower when you have more case filings and
more work to do per person."
8:17:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER questioned why the remaining district
court judge would not be overwhelmed.
MS. MEADE offered that there is another position, which is the
magistrate judge, and that judge currently is doing a lot of
preparatory work for the two Juneau Superior Court judges. If
HB 298 passes, that magistrate judge would take on more district
court work addressing minor offenses. Further, she said
superior court judges can handle district court matters. She
said this caseload distribution would be coordinated. She noted
that this one district court judge and two superior court judge
combination is the current model in Kenai, Alaska, which has
nearly identical case filing numbers. In response to a follow-
up question, she said if Juneau gets the three superior court
judges, all three would be doing some district court work. She
said no additional training will be necessary for the magistrate
judge to do the necessary work.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said, "I'm wondering how you're spinning
gold out of straw here." He said he wants to make sure there is
no work left uncovered.
MS. MEADE responded that there would be the same number of cases
with people who can do more to handle the right types of cases.
She added, "And if that one judge could handle some of their
work instead, that would alleviate the pressure, and it will
also alleviate the traveling judge having to come up here, and
it will change what the ... magistrate judge focuses most of his
time on." In response to a follow-up question, she said the
court has no plans to ask for further judge changes or
additional magistrates. She said the court is "always moving
people around," but it is only for the superior court judge that
the court needs the authorization from the legislature.
8:22:20 AM
CO-CHAIR PARISH opened public testimony on HB 298. After
ascertaining that there was no one who wished to testify, he
closed public testimony.
CO-CHAIR PARISH stated that because HB 298 is "rather
uncontroversial," has a zero fiscal note, and is going to be
heard by another committee of referral, he would entertain a
motion to move it out of committee.
8:23:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LINCOLN moved to report HB 298 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal
note.
8:23:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO objected for the purpose of discussion.
He said Ms. Meade's presentation of the proposed legislation was
one of the better ones he has heard. He said after hearing the
aforementioned address yesterday and Ms. Meade's testimony
today, he thinks HB 298 is noncontroversial and probably will
solve huge issues in the First Judicial Court District.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO removed his objection.
8:24:04 AM
CO-CHAIR PARISH announced that there being no further objection,
HB 298 was reported out of the House Community and Regional
Affairs Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB269 Additional Documents - Pioneering Spirits Article - 2.8.18.pdf |
HCRA 2/8/2018 8:00:00 AM |
HB 269 |
| HB269 Supporting Documents - Support Letters 2.8.18.pdf |
HCRA 2/8/2018 8:00:00 AM |
HB 269 |
| HB298 Fiscal Note DPS-DET-01-27-18.pdf |
HCRA 2/8/2018 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB298 Fiscal Note JUD-ACS-01-22-18.pdf |
HCRA 2/8/2018 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB298 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HCRA 2/8/2018 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB298 Supporting Case Filing Data.pdf |
HCRA 2/8/2018 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB298A.PDF |
HCRA 2/8/2018 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB267 Amendment J.4.pdf |
HCRA 2/8/2018 8:00:00 AM |
HB 267 |
| HB269 Additional Documents - FY15 - 17 Distillery Sales 2.8.18.pdf |
HCRA 2/8/2018 8:00:00 AM |
HB 269 |